[view cover]
Richard C. Borden, Electronics Division
Tirey K. Vickers, Navigation Aids Evaluation Division
Technical Development -Report No, 180
May 1953
FAA Library
Sinclair Weeks, Secretary
F. M. Lee, Administrator
D. M. Stuart, Director, Technical Development and Evaluation Center
Class	        TL 568
Book		A21N
Vol.	 	no 180 
Copy		3
This is a technical information report and does not 
necessarily represent CAA policy in all respects.
SUMMARY                                                                                         1
INTRODUCTION                                                                                1
OFFICIAL RECORDS                                                                         1
HISTORICAL REFERENCES                                                            4
WASHINGTON OBSERVATIONS                                                  5
ANALYSIS OF WASHINGTON DATA                                         6
CONCLUSIONS                                                                                 14
RECOMMENDATIONS                                                                   15
BIBLIOGRAPHY                                                                                16
The Air Navigation Development Board (ANDB) was established by the Departments of Defense and Commerce in 1948 to carry
out a unified development program aimed at meeting the stated operational requirements of the common military/civil air navigation
and traffic control system.  This project, sponsored and financed by the ANDB is a part of that program.  The ANDB is located
within the administrative framework of the Civil Aeronautics Administration for housekeeping purposes only.  Persons
desiring to communicate with ANDB should address the Executive Secretary, Air Navigation Development Board, Civil Aeronautics
Administration, W-9, Washington 25, D. C.
GPO 31-105177-1
This report describes the investigation of a type of unidentified moving target which has been observed recently in considerable numbers
on the viewing screens of air traffic control radar equipment operated by the Civil Aeronautics Administration.  This investigation  was
conducted by means of interviews with personnel concerned, by study and correlation of official records, and by first-hand observation of
numerous targets on the Washington Microwave-Early-Warning (MEW) radar and on the Indianapolis ASR-2 radar.
 It was determined that targets which are known to operating personnel by various terminologies such as "ghosts," "angels," or "pixies"
do not represent new phenomena; nor are they peculiar to the Washington area. Correlation of controllers' reports with United States
Weather Bureau records indicated that a surface temperature inversion was almost always noted when such targets appeared on the radar.
Firsthand observation in the tracking and subsequent motion analysis of 80 of these unidentified targets indicated that a large number of
these were actually secondary reflections of the radar beam.  Apparently these reflections were produced by isolated refracting areas which
traveled with the wind at or near the temperature inversion levels.
Although the exact size, shape, and composition of these isolated areas are not known, it is believed that they may be atmospheric eddies
produced by a shearing action of dissimilar air strata.  It appears possible that such eddies may refract and focus the radar energy with a 
lens effect to produce small concentrations of ground return with sufficient intensity to show up on the radar display.  It is also believed
that the correlation of the appearance of these radar targets with visual reports of so-called "flying saucers" is due to the strong probability
that both effects are caused primarily by abrupt temperature inversions.
 Such radar targets are usually easy to recognize because of their generally weak return and slow ground speed.  Unfortunately, radar
returns from small helicopters sometimes present these some characteristics.  Spurious targets of this type can become a nuisance under
busy traffic conditions, particularly in localities where helicopter operations are prevalent.
 Closely related to a recent flood of visual reports of flying saucers, the sighting f scores of unidentified targets on the Washington Air
Route Traffic Control Center (ARTC) radar aroused much publicity and speculation regarding the origin, composition, and import of these
objects.  Concerned with the possible detrimental effects of this situation on the control of air traffic, the Air Navigation Development
Board requested the Technical Development and Evaluation Center of the CAA to investigate the problem.
The specific objectives of this study were:
    1. To find out as much as possible about the nature of the targets themselves.
    2. To determine whether this problem is new and peculiar to the Washington area or whether it had occurred previously at Washington
	and at other CAA radar locations.
    3. To determine the effect of this problem on the control of air traffic.
    4. To determine what changes should be made in the radar development program in order to cope with the situation. 
As one of the first steps in this study, all records of these phenomena reported in the logs of the Washington ARTC Center were tabulated.
The tabulation, given as Table I of this report, was taken to the Analysis Section of the United States Weather Bureau where it was
correlated with meteorological data for the periods involved.  It was then discovered that a temperature inversion had been indicated in
almost every instance when the unidentified radar targets or visual objects had been reported.  Weather analysts were asked whether any
unusual weather conditions had prevailed over the Washington area during the period covering the occurrences of large numbers of the
unidentified radar targets.  Their report may be condensed as follows:
Monthly Weather Summary, July 1952.
The heat wave that broke records in the eastern portion of the United States during the month of Tune continued on through July,
becoming intensified during the latter part of the month.  July weather maps were characterized  by a well-developed Bermuda high
pressure area which remained in the vicinity of the southeastern coast line during the entire period.  This high pressure area was
responsible for an anticyclonic (clockwise) circulation of air over the eastern United States, a movement which continued during the month.
This flow brought warm, moist air up from the Gulf of Mexico.  The warm air mass usually extended up to about 10,000 feet.  At higher levels
the flow was from the west-southwest, and this continental air mass from the southwestern desert and drought area was hot and dry.
 Stagnation and heating of the air over the eastern United States was further increased because of an extremely strong band of westerly
winds along the northern United States border, winds which prevented cold Canadian air masses from pushing south.  Cyclonic activity
was confined mostly to the area north of this band of westerly winds.  There was a notable lack of thunderstorm activity in the Washington
area.  Physicists at the Naval Observatory reported that the amount of electrification in the air was very low. 
The foregoing analysis indicated that the lack of cloud cover promoted solar heating in the daytime and rapid radiation cooling of the
surface at night, This combination, with the prevailing light winds, was unusually conducive to the formation of temperature inversions
during the hours of darkness.
Since the visual reports of flying saucers indicated that the observed lights spanned the same color range as the aurora borealis and since
auroral effects closely follow sunspot activity, personnel of the Naval Observatory were consulted in order to determine whether any
unusual sunspot activity had occurred during the period in question.  They reported that there had been no unusual activity of this nature.
Reports from Other Locations.
The Washington ARTC Center is the only one equipped with air route surveillance radar.  However, several CAA control towers are
equipped with airport surveillance radar, Type ASR-1.  A survey of these locations produced the following results:
ATLANTA, Municipal Airport.  No unidentified targets of this nature have been reported.
BOSTON, Logan Field.  Unidentified targets have been noticed on rare occasions.  One slow-moving target was observed during
	instrument flying weather conditions about August 1, 1952.  No interference with traffic has been caused by this problem.
CHICAGO, Midway Airport.  Unidentified targets have been seen on many occasions, particularly when temperature inversions have been
	in effect and low smoke hung over the city.  They are usually given as traffic information to other aircraft and occasionally form a
	nuisance problem, since there is a considerable helicopter activity at and around the airport.
CLEVELAND, Municipal Airport.  Unidentified radar targets have been observed many times.  The chief controller reported that on a
	recent occasion such targets moving slowly from west to east showed up in all portions of the scope face.
MINNEAPOLIS, International Airport.  No targets of this nature have been reported.
NEW YORK, New York International Airport.  No targets of this nature have been reported.
   LaGuardia Airport.  Only one such instance was reported.  At the time it was thought to be due to difficulties within the radar itself.
WASHINGTON, National Airport.  Targets of this nature have been observed occasionally over a long period.  Recent occasions are
	logged in Table I of this report.
The history of radar abounds with reports of strange echoes received from supposedly clear skies.  Early observers suspected birds or
stray weather balloons, but these were eliminated by visual checks. Conjecture that clouds of insects were responsible was also
eliminated when such echoes were obtained in the dead of winter.  Some connection with the weather was suspected after it was noted
that echoes of this type became more numerous on summer nights under calm conditions.  Additional evidence indicated that many of
these echoes originated in the fine structures of the dielectric (refracting) layers of air-mass boundaries and in regions of air turbulence.
Some of the sharpest echoes involved surfaces of pronounced transitions of the water-vapor content of the air.  The bibliography  at the
end of this report contains numerous detailed references to these general phenomena.
August 13-14, 1952.
The observation period started at 1830 Eastern standard time (EST) on the evening of August 13.  At the beginning of this period, the
moving target indicator was gated to cancel out ground returns up to a range of 10 nautical miles.  Beyond this range the scope was clear
except for a few permanent echoes that were visible.
Suddenly, at approximately 1957 EST, a group of seven strong stationary targets became visible in an area about 15 miles north-northeast
of the radar antenna.  During the next two or three antenna revolutions, the area on the scope between Washington and Baltimore became
heavily sprinkled with stationary targets in a belt about 6 miles wide.  A group of additional targets became visible in an area approximately
10 to 15 miles south of the radar antenna.  This was evidence of the beginning of a temperature inversion.
Within the next minute, at approximately 1958 EST. four unidentified moving targets showed up 5 miles southeast of the radar antenna
and moved in a southerly direction away from it.  When the radar beam was switched from high to low, the targets disappeared.  The beam
was switched back to high, and the targets returned.
Targets were uniformly small and  usually had a weak, fuzzy appearance.  However, the target intensity varied from sweep to sweep.
Occasionally one or two very strong returns would be received in succession, followed by almost total blanking.
For the next four and one-half hours, many unidentified targets were carefully plotted with a grease pencil on the face of the Type VG
scope.  The time for each was entered on these plots in order to calculate ground speeds.  To secure a permanent record, time data and
track plots were transferred from the scope face to a sheet of frosted acetate.  These plots are reproduced in Figs. 1, 2, and Fig. 3. The
distribution of target ranges is shown in Fig. 4.  The average distance that any target was tracked continuously was approximately
2.1 nautical miles.
The observation period was discontinued at 0030 EST on August 14, and steps were taken to secure all available meteorological data
relevant to the observation period.  The local radiosonde observation which was taken near the midpoint of the observation period,
at 2200 EST on August 13, is reproduced in Fig. 5.  Winds aloft, as observed at the same time, are listed in Table II.
August 15-16, 1952.
On the night of August 15-16, additional track plots were obtained by Washington ARTC Center personnel.  During this period, the radar
was operating on the high beam with the moving target indicator gated to 12 miles. The same stationary targets in the Washington-Baltimore
belt and in an area 10 to 15 miles south of the radar antenna were visible again on the scope face. 
Track plots for this period are shown in Figs. 6 and 7. The local radiosonde observation taken at 2200 EST on August 15 is reproduced in
Fig. 8. Winds aloft, as observed at the same time, are listed in Table III.
It will be noted from Table I that many more unidentified targets are picked up by the Washington ARTC Center than by the Washington
Airport Traffic Control Tower.  This may be explained by the fact that the center is equipped with a MEW radar, while the tower is equipped
with an airport surveillance radar, Type ASR-1.  The most significant differences between the two types of equipment are listed in the
   1. The peak power of the MEW is 3 decibels (db) higher than the ASR-1.
   2. The average power of the MEW is 6 db higher than the average power of the ASR-1.
   3. The MEW has a higher elevation angle coverage.
   4.  The MEW elicits approximately twice as many hits per scan per target since the scan rate of the MEW is 6 revolutions per minute
	(rpm).  Additional specifications of these radars are listed in Table IV. 
The almost simultaneous appearance of the first moving targets with the ground returns, signifying the beginning of the temperature
inversion, suggested that the target display was perhaps caused by some effects existing in or near the inversion layers.
It will be noted in Figs. 1, 2, and Fig. 3 that all targets observed in the first period were moving from the north or northwest.  In Fig. 6 all targets
were moving from the south or southwest, and in Fig. 7 all were moving from the west or northwest.  The definite directional trend in each
case eliminated the possibility that the unidentified targets were 
                   WINDS ALOFT
            22OO EST  August 13, 1952
            Altitude Direction Velocity
           (MSL) (Degrees)  (Knots)
            Surface   Calm        0
              1000      Calm        0
              2000        350       12
              3000        340       12
              4000        320       14
              5000        320       16
              6000        300       18
              7000        300       20
              8000        310       20
              9000        310       22
             10000       300       26
             11000       290       28
             12000       290       29
             13000       300       30
             14000       300       28
             15000       290       29
             16000       300       29
             17000       300       29
             18000       300       30
             19000       300       32
             20000       300       38
             21000       290       38
             22000       280       43
             23000       280       48
             24000       280       50
             25000       270       52
             26000       280       57
             27000       270       61
             28000       270       54
             29000       270       55
             30000       200       62
             31000       270       63
             32000       280       73
             33000       280       84
surface vehicles such as trains, trucks, automobiles, or boats.   Had this been the case, some vehicles would have been moving in the
reverse directions.  In each case, target directions corresponded with the wind
                    TABLE III
               WINDS ALOFT
          2200 EST August 15, 1952
         Altitude Direction Velocity
           (MSL)    (Degrees)  (Knots)
            Surface     170         5
              1000        180       24
              2000        190       26
              3000        210       24
              4000        210       23
              5000        220       20
              6000        220       16
              7000        220       18
              8000        220       17
              9000        220       13
             10000       240       12
             11000       270       11
             12000       270       13
             13000       260       17
             14000       260       21
             15000       260       25
             16000       270       25
             17000       270       23
             18000       270       22
             19000       270       21
             20000       260       20
             21000       270       22
             22000       280       24
             23000       290       26
             24000       280       26
             25000       290       26
             26000       300       30
             27000       300       34
             28000       300       38
             29000       290       38
             30000       290       36
             31000       300       35
             32000       300       35
             33000       310       34
             34000       310       40
             35000       300       47
             36000       300       49
             37000       300       so
             38000       300       48
             39000       310       42
             40000       320       38
             41000       300       43
             42000       300       53
             43000       300       67
             44000       310       69
             45000       310       60
directions reported aloft.  This fact suggested that whatever was producing the targets as being carried by the wind, 
The next step of the analysis was to determine, if possible, the altitude of the objects which produced the radar targets.  Since the radar
actually measures slant range which could in some cases be almost directly overhead from the high-beam MEW antenna, the minimum
range of each target was used to determine the absolute maximum altitude of the object producing the target.
                                    TABLE IV
  						Tower Radar			  Center Radar
   Type                                           ASR-1                            MEW
   Frequency                                  S-band                          S-band
   Pulse-repetition frequency      1,000                              900
   Pulse rate                                    0.5 microsecond          1 microsecond
   Vertical coverage                       6,000 feet at 6 miles    12,000 feet at 3 miles
   Scan Rate                                    28 per minute               6 per minute
   Display scopes                          12DP7                            12DP7 and VG2
   Power output                             200 kilowatts                 400 kilowatts
For example, a target which came within five nautical miles of the radar antenna could not be above an altitude of five nautical miles, or
30,400 feet.  With the use of the slant-range principle, the absolute maximum altitude of each target was determined and is listed in
Table V. When attempting later to determine the probable altitude of each target by studying the winds aloft, it was useful to have these
maximum altitude figures to eliminate the necessity for consideration of higher altitude levels.
Since winds aloft can vary considerably during the period of a few hours, it was decided to use in this analysis only data on targets which
were under observation during the periods from one hour before to one hour after the observations of the local winds aloft.  These targets
are listed in Table V.
During the observation period on the night of August 13-14, all targets on a southerly heading had ground speeds of at least 24 knots.
The only reported winds with a southerly heading had a velocity of only 12 knots.  These were winds at the 2,000- and 3,000-foot levels.
Targets on a southeasterly heading had a speed range of 32 to 48 knots.  However, the only winds on this heading were from 14 knots at
4,000 feet to 38 knots at 20,000 feet.
During the August 15-16 observations, targets on a north or northeasterly heading had speeds of 35 to 42 knots.  The only reported 
winds moving in this direction ranged between 5 and 26 knots from the surface up to 9,000 feet.  Targets on easterly headings had speeds
from 22 to 45 knots.  The only reported winds moving in this direction had speeds of from 10 to 24 knots between 10,000 and 25,000 feet.
In Fig. 9 and Fig. 10, the directions and velocities of the winds aloft are plotted on a polar projection diagram together with the directions and
velocities of the observed targets.  Agreement between the directions of the winds and the directions of the targets is apparent.
One of the theoretically possible causes of the unidentified targets was the delayed pulse or second-time-around effect inherent in the
radar method of time measurement.  With a second-time-around effect, objects beyond the normal sweep range of a radar can be displayed
on the scope because of reception of an echo pulse elicited not by the transmitted pulse which triggers the range sweep but by the
preceding transmitted pulse.  The apparent velocity of the target on the radar is no greater than and normally less than the velocity of the
object producing the return.  The heading of the radar target would not necessarily be parallel to the heading of the object unless the
object was on a course radial to the radar antenna.  These effects are illustrated in Fig. 11.
If we assume then that an object producing a second-time-around radar target was being carried by the wind, the apparent velocity of the
target would be no greater than the wind velocity.  However, the analysis of the targets listed in Table V showed that
                                       TABLE V
Date       Starting       Direction       Target       Reflector Speed        Absolute Maximum        Probable Altitude
Aug.       Time           (Degrees)       Speed       (1/2 Target                  Altitude (Based on          (Based on
1952         EST                                   (Knots)       Speed)                     Minimum Slant Range       Winds Aloft)
13            2159                005                  28            14                                            63000                                2000
                2201                360                  24            12                                            75000                                2000
                2229                310                  33            16.5                                         23000                                8000
                2240                300                  46            23                                            30000                                9000
                2242                325                  48            24                                            33000                                9000
                2259                010                  31            15.5                                         31000                                2000
                2303                330                  42            21                                            36000                                8000
                2330                340                  39            19.5                                         23000                                5000
                2330                305                  39            19.5                                         24000                                8000
                2331                315                  39            19.5                                         35000                                8000
                2332                315                  36            18                                            23000                                8000
                2345                310                  38            19                                            19000                                8000
                2347                310                  42            21                                            43000                                8000
                2349                290                  39            19.5                                         35000                                7000
                2356                300                  42            21                                            37000                                7000
                2355                350                  36            18                                            83000                                2000
15            2213                260                  45            22.5                                         34000                              14000
                2226                225                  35            17.5                                         24000                                  900
                2230                250                  28            14                                            37000                              10500
                2238                185                  36            18                                            29000                                  900
                2240                210                  42            21                                            18000                                4500
                2353                275                  23            11.5                                         29000                              10500*
*This target could also have been a direct radar return from an object floating with the wind at 15000 to 17000 feet mean sea level.
They were actually moving at speeds approximately double the wind velocities reported for the directions involved.  This fact eliminated
the possibility that the targets were being produced by the second-time-around effect.
When the target velocities plotted in Fig. 9 and Fig. 10 were halved, those plotted points clustered very closely around the wind plots.
Further investigation of the doubled-speed effect indicated that this effect could be produced if the original radar beam were reflected
downward to give a ground return, as shown in Fig. 12.  If we assume that some sort of horizontal reflector was present aloft and that the
angle of reflection equaled the angle of incidence of the radar beam, any horizontal movement of the reflector would produce a movement
twice as great in the image being received on the radar scope.  Furthermore.- the apparent motion of the image would be parallel to the
motion of the reflector, as illustrated in Fig. 13. 
When the observed target velocities were divided by two, the target motions corresponded closely to the reported wind directions and
velocities at certain altitude levels.   In nearly all of these cases the altitude levels, which are listed as probable altitudes in Table V, were at
or adjacent to the temperature inversion levels. 
With only one exception, no targets were seen moving at the speed and heading of the reported wind at any altitude.  This suggested that
the reflecting areas, which were capable of bending the radar beam, were nevertheless not of sufficient density to produce direct returns on
the radar scope. Thus, it appeared likely that the reflection effect was being produced by the atmosphere itself.  If this were the case, it
would probably be a refraction rather than a reflection which was involved.  This effect is shown in Fig. 14.
The uniformly small size of the observed targets as well as the relatively low frequency of their occurrences suggested that the conditions
producing this effect were extremely localized and decidedly critical.  Although the exact nature of the discontinuity is not known, one
possible explanation might be that it is an eddy in the atmosphere.  Such eddies may be produced by the shearing effect of dissimilar air
masses moving at different speeds and headings at or near the inversion boundary.  They might under certain conditions produce bulges
in the inversion layer, concentrating and directing the radar energy with a lens effect to produce a return signal strong enough to show up
on the radar scope.  The relatively short paths of some of the radar targets before their fadeout might be attributed to the dissipation of these
eddies in the stratified air mass.
Intermediate speed checks on numerous targets indicated that individual velocities remained quite steady during the observation period.
It became possible to predict with accuracy the progress of specific targets from minute to minute.  There was no evidence of hovering or
of sudden increases in speed by any target.  It is believed that previous reports of sudden accelerations of targets to supersonic velocities
were due to a controller's transfer of identity from a faded target to another target which was just appearing on a different section of the
It would be unwise to assume that all unidentified slow-moving radar targets are caused by refraction of radar energy.  Small rain clouds
produce much the same appearance on the scope.  Other targets could be direct returns from bird formations, balloons, or debris carried
aloft by convection or tornadoes.  It has recently been reported that more than 4,000 balloons are released in the United States every day
by Government and civilian research organizations.[1] A recent analysis of more than 1,000 visual reports of unidentified flying objects by
the Air Technical Intelligence Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base indicates that 21.3 per cent of these may be attributed to
balloons. [2]
Examination of the logs of the Washington ARTC Center indicates that there is considerable correlation between the appearance of
unidentified targets on the radar scope and the receipt of numerous visual reports of flying saucers.  It should be noted that abrupt
temperature inversions aloft can refract light in much the same way as radar waves and produce mirage effects.  In a standard reference
work on meteorology. [3] Humphreys reports that a temperature inversion (near the surface) of 1 deg. C per meter bends down a light ray
into an arc whose radius is 0.16 that of the earth; an inversion of 10 deg. C per meter gives an arc radius of 0.016 that of the earth, or
approximately 60 miles.  This effect makes it possible for an observer to see in the sky the sun  or some other bright light that is actually
well below the observer's horizon.  On rare occasions, multiple images of the same object may be visible.  It is believed that many visual
sightings of flying saucers can be explained by this phenomenon.
November 4, 1952.
During test runs of the new ASR-2 radar equipment, a large number of unidentified moving targets appeared on the scope at
approximately 4 p.m. The sun was low in the sky, and the sky was clear of all clouds.  Ceiling and visibility were unrestricted.
Pilot temperature reports from a departing aircraft indicated that a pronounced  temperature inversion existed at the 6,000-foot level.
Although no targets were plotted, a check on several indicated that their movement corresponded to the direction of the wind at the
inversion level, with a velocity roughly double the wind velocity.  Targets were larger, stronger, and more numerous than those
observed by the writers during the Washington observations.  At times the clutter made it difficult to keep track of actual aircraft targets
on the scope.
November 5, 1952.
At approximately 4 p.m., a group of similar targets appeared on the Indianapolis ASR-2 scope.  Again the sky was clear of clouds;
ceiling and visibility were unrestricted.  Targets were strong. numerous, and of various shapes and sizes.
A simultaneous check of the L-band radar showed that only a few targets were being picked up by this equipment.  The L-band
targets appeared considerably weaker than those seen on the ASR-2 scope, although L-band aircraft targets appeared normal.
By manipulation of the ASR-2 antenna motor switch, it was possible to slew the antenna to beam it directly at some of the unidentified
targets.  The video return was displayed on an A-scope for closer analysis of the target characteristics.  Comparisons were made with
the A-scope characteristics of aircraft targets.
Aircraft targets showed sharp rise a "decay times as well as relatively constant shape and amplitude.  The unidentified targets showed
gradual rise and decay times, amplitude and shape showed wide variation which resulted in a random interlaced sign envelope similar to
that returned by rain and cloud formations.  These target characteristics are sketched in Fig. 15.
The reduced target returns from the L-band radar indicated that the reflecting areas are formed by atmospheric disturbances or
discontinuities rather than by some form of ionization.  If the cause were ionization, it would be expected that the lower frequency
of the L-band equipment would increase the susceptibility of the radar energy to reflection or refraction effects.  An example of this
trend is that of ionospheric layers which produce no appreciable reflection of ultra-high-frequency energy but cause strong skip
propagation of the lower radio frequencies.
The generally weak and fuzzy appearance as well as the slow speed of spurious radar targets usually enable them to be recognized as
such by experienced radar controllers.  Normally these targets have but little effect on traffic control, because they occupy very little
space in relation to the entire scope area and their progress on course is very slow.  The most dangerous possibility from the traffic
control standpoint is the chance that one of these targets might be a helicopter.
If their course will not collide with that of an aircraft target, such targets are generally disregarded.  If the course will collide with an
aircraft target, some control action is indicated because of the helicopter hazard.  In such cases, prudent controllers will give traffic
information to pilots regarding the unidentified target, particularly at night under visual flight rule conditions.  Where a collision course
is involved, pilots would rather be warned about a spurious target than not be warned about a legitimate one. 
At the present time, very little instrument flying is done by helicopters.  Therefore, unidentified targets of this type are not usually
given as traffic information to pilots known to be operating on instruments.
    1. It is believed that most of the unidentified targets observed on the Washington MEW radar during the period beginning on the
	night of August 13, 1952 and the period beginning on the night of August 15, 1952 were ground returns caused by reflection
	phenomena closely connected with the temperature inversions in the lower atmosphere.
    2. Unidentified radar targets of the type described in this report have been noticed since the early days of radar.  Unusual
	weather conditions prevailing in the Washington area during the summer of 1952 were exceptionally conducive to the formation
	of these phenomena.
    3. Present evidence indicates that the appearance of unidentified targets of this nature on radar scopes has but little effect on
	the control of air traffic.  At its worst, it forms a nuisance by cluttering the scope display and by requiring that additional traffic
	information or heading instructions be issued in order to protect other traffic against the possibility that such a target might be a
    4. In some cases, it would be desirable to provide the controller with a more positive method of identifying targets such as these
	so that he could determine quickly whether they are spurious or whether they are actual aircraft.
    1. In order to secure additional evidence regarding the causes, extent, and effects of this type of phenomena, it would be desirable
	to secure additional target plots from the horizontal plotting scope of the Washington ARTC Center.  It would also be desirable for
	all CAA air traffic control agencies which use radar equipment to log the occurrence of such targets.  Notes regarding the extent and
	motion characteristics of them, together with their effects on the control of air traffic, would also be of value.  It would be desirable to
	correlate all these reports with official United States Weather Bureau records.
    2. Should additional research regarding these phenomena be undertaken, close coordination with the local office of the United States
	Weather Bureau is essential in order that observations can be made when conducive meteorological conditions are expected.
    3. It is believed that more complete evidence could be obtained through the use of more flexible radar equipment.  A tremendous
	asset in evaluating the nature of false targets would be the ability to track continuously a specific target through use of a manual
	slewing control. It would then be desirable to examine this target closely on an A-scope radar presentation.  A number of commercially 
	available synchroscopes are ideally suited for this purpose.  The echo could be enlarged on such a presentation to a width of one inch
	or more.  Examination of the resulting trace including such characteristics as steepness of rise and decay time, energy distribution, and
	fluctuations in amplitude should make it possible to deduce a great deal regarding the source of the reflection.
    4. Additional simultaneous observations of the phenomena on L-band and S-band radar equipment would be desirable, The availability
	of aircraft which could be guided by radar to the area of the target or to the primary reflecting area would also be advantageous.
	Additional information maybe obtained by equipping the aircraft with an aero-psychograph as well as with suitable apparatus for
	measuring electrical charges in these areas.
    5. When helicopter traffic becomes more prevalent, it may be desirable to provide the controller with some type of radar accessory
	which can detect propeller modulation and which can give him the means to determine positively whether an unidentified target is an
	aircraft or a reflection.  It is recommended that this type of accessory be studied in connection with the proposed evaluation program
	for the ASR-2 radar.
"Echoes from the Atmosphere," Bell Laboratories Record, Vol. 25, No. 2, Feb. 1947, p. 5.
Friend, A.W. "Theory and Practice of Tropospheric Sounding by Radar," Proceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers, 
Vol. 37, No. 2, Feb. 1949. p. 116.
Friis, H. T,. "Radar Reflections from the Lower Atmosphere," Proceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers, Vol. 35, No. 5, 
May 1947, p. 494.
Goldstein, Herbert, "Origin of the Echo," in "Propagation of Short Radio Waves," Massachusetts Institute of Technology Radiation 
Laboratory Series, McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, New York, 1951, Vol. 13 edited by Donald E. Kerr, Chapter 7, pp. 593-595.
Gordon, W. E., "A Theory of Radar Reflections  from the Lower Atmosphere," Proceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers, Vol. 37,  
No. 1, Jan. 1949, p. 41.
Gould, William B., "Radar Reflections from the Lower Atmosphere," Proceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers, Vol. 35, No. 10, 
Oct. 1947, p. 1105.
Humphreys, W. J., "Physics of the Air," McGraw-Hill Publishing Cornpany, New York, 1940.
"Many Potential 'Saucers,' " Science News Letter, Vol. 62, No. 7, Aug. 16, 1952, p. 106.
"Radar Returns from the Lower Atmosphere Viewed on an AN/GNP-2 Screen," Landing Aids Experiment Station Progress Report, 
1948 Test Section, Electronics, pp. 22-24.
[1]	Many Potential "Saucers,", Science News Letter, Vol. 62, No. 7, Aug. 16, 1952, p. 106.
[2]	"Unidentifted Aerial Objects Receive Careful Analysis by Air Force Experts," The Aircraft Flash, published by
	Department of the Air Force, Air Defense Command, Vol. 1, No. 4, Jan. 1953, p. 4.
[3]	Humphreys, W. J., "Physics of the Air," McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, New York, 1940.
Top of page
Return to CUFON's Washington National Sightings File page 


Please Credit CUFON as the source of this material

The Computer UFO Network
Seattle Washington USA
(425) 776-0382 8 Data Bits, No Parity, 1 Stop Bit

SYSOP - Jim Klotz -- Information Director - Dale Goudie

UFO Reporting and Information Service
Voice Line - unavailableP.O.Mail unavailable, Mercer Island, WA 98040, USA